Crackdown 3 doesn't reinvent the wheel, set a new standard for the genre, or try to be anything special, aside from simply being, well, Crackdown.
It has a 59 metacritic average for a reason. Nice damage control though.
Because metacritic is the final say all in all things. You do realize that metacritic is simply the average of all scores right? Which means there are high scores from people who like it. There just happens to be more scores from people who don't Damage control is you all feeling the need to attack any positive news pertaining to Microsoft.
Yes I think people know how metacritic works bro. You don’t get a 59 on metacritic unless your game is shit and most of the reviews are bad which crackdown 3 reviews are so yeah it’s not rocket science.
There are 5 high scores. Out of 56. Common sense would tell you those scores are pretty lenient.
I dont see how people consider this game average when there really arent any games like it. I think people are still very much into games that carry emotion or some artsy edgy ingredients. Thats fine also but Crackdown 3 is a pure game with fun factors studious of games like Mario in its dna.
And it's not rocket science to know that just because you don't like something doesn't mean others can't thoroughly enjoy it...so it can have nothing to do with damage control. And apparently everyone doesn't know metacritic works bro.
The game does nothing new or innovative. The city is bland, the models, environment density, lighting, variety, etcetera is very plain and clearly sacrificed to get the game out. It doesn't have any original system for character progression. It's just as basic as it gets. The combat is hand holding at its finest. The narrative is not good, and we don't need it to be amazing or complex. It can be simple and still be fine, but it basically was just audio dialogue to listen to. Something that Crackdown 3 isn't alone in doing and getting marked down for. It's an unimaginative game. Clearly made for filling in their lack of ideas and to spear head their cloud enhanced gaming hype. Which was extremely exaggerated, and again and again is not something that only their cloud servers can do. Any server can do it, and it's not special. Their servers are at a gaming disadvantage because they are older and were never meant for heavy applications. A newer server to handle more load is what competitors are using. Just because they are obnoxiously big clusters of them doesn't mean anything. They aren't targeting a larger demographic of non-gaming use for other clients and PC applications. The game may not be broken(well, the physics can be), but it's clearly an incomplete and uninspired sequel. It's an example of how a game turns out when you just want to make something for the sake of making it rather than throwing out interesting concepts, ideas, and goals for the product. I hope that the new studios do have their freedom and hopefully they can promote great creative minds from them to lead their current studios that don't know what direction to take and to pursue risks.
"And it's not rocket science to know that just because you don't like something doesn't mean others can't thoroughly enjoy it...so it can have nothing to do with damage control." So put out a review about how thoroughly enjoyable the game is. Where it becomes damage control is when an opinion piece is created (within days of release no less) to tell you it's not as bad as people are saying. That's cut and dry damage control.
It's a consensus among those who have played the game, viewers and critics alike. Everyone agrees the game sucks, you don't have to agree with the majority though, you can still play it and enjoy it, despite the fact that everyone else thinks it's trash.
It just Consensus of all the reviews, but wow your comment just reminded me of Lady Gaga (turned Country) lyrics. Give me a million reasons Givin' me a million reasons About a million reasons When I bow down to pray I try to make the worst seem better Lord, show me the way To cut through all his worn out leather I've got a hundred million reasons to walk away But baby, I just need one good one, good one Tell me that you'll be the good one, good one Baby, I just need one good one to stay
Read what you just wrote, and if you don't find the irony in your point of view, please let me know. 😂😂😂
I mean, White Knight Chronicles 2 was one of my favourite games of Last Gen and it's not rated well. That's on the person playing. The game did have a simple damsel in distress story with 3 arcs for the first game where it was pretty predictable. But I liked it because it was fresh for the time it released as games stopped being like that. I loved the combat as well, but it takes alot of time setting up the best and most ideal combos and sets. I'd rate that game a 10 to this day. But I've easily accepted it's not for majority of people. That's how gaming works in general. I think Tactics and SRPGs are in general all boring trash. But that's not everyone. That's just me. Everyone has opinions. What makes a fact in such a situation is general feel. Not a opinion piece trying to defend it. It should be a review expressing what they think of the game. It's called damage control at this point. Also I don't get the negative remark on Metacritic. That's literally the best way to actually judge a game. A score average among all the reviewers. What better way is possible that's not thought up? Foreal.
@raul, well then technically all opinion pieces are damage control. Even those that are out to try to negatively impact something. To someone on the opposite side of something. Seeing positive influence can be damagin% to their perspective so they try to control that by negatively impacting the effort. The term damage control goes both ways. And its no surprise there are those who try their best to undermine what they dislike in order to get others to be sheep as well. @blue, no... not everyone says its trash. Quite the opposite really. The trash talk has been centered on the development time, hype over cloud power and lackluster game elements that dont differentiate from the first. Despite that, all reviewers agree there is some fun to be had. So you are wrong by saying "everyone". You can cherry pick people who support your view but then again I can prob find more that dont. At the end of the day a game can still be fun no matter the score. So stop being a sheep, play it yourself and then see if you still believe what is written.
For the most part the majority of gamers are morons in the literal sense. They lack the ability to understand individual opinion are almost always run with the group think.
Metacritic is pretty accurate over the long term. Give it some time.
Well, considering Metacritic's score is an average based on major gaming news outlets' reviews of a game, which results in an average score that gives an overall view of a game's quality... yeah, Metacritic pretty much does have final say. By the way, Game Rankings' score of the game is pretty pathetic, too.
@uRaDecepticon Lol, what? Saints Row 4 is EXACTLY the same gameplay formula as Crackdown 3, except it's infinitely more entertaining, is a PS3/360 era game that plays better than a current-gen one and you can get it along with its expansion for pennies. And if you expand it to include other superpowered open world games that don't have exact gameplay but similar, you can add Prototype, inFamous and the recent Spider-Man to that list. Crackdown may be many things, but a unique gaming experience it is certainly friggin' not.
@Darth I don't know how you derived "well then technically all opinion pieces are damage control" from my comment. It even delineated the point at which an opinion piece goes from being just an opinion piece to doing damage control. This isn't just "I really like Crackdown." It's right there in the title. They're trying to use their opinion to undermine the credibility of the less favorable reviews. That doesn't say anything about why they may be engaging in damage control or whether or not they have a point, but it is obviously damage control.
uRaDeception First, people don't consider Crackdown 3 average, it's a 59 Meta and quite honestly it looks awful. It's considered a terrible game. Second, there are many games similar to Crackdown. Saints Row 4 is incredibly similar and Agents of Mayhem is very much the same, only it's vastly superior. Agents has better visuals, more humor/character, and better combat and physics. Even Just Cause scratches that Crackdown itch, but at a much higher quality. Of course Infamous is also extremely similar, and quite honestly, it's a class above Crackdown. Second Son was a high quality production all around. Visuals, voice acting, combat, and platforming were all spectacular. There really are numerous games that play similarly to Crackdown, it isn't at all unique. Prototype, Spider-man, you name it.
@Darth72 No, Darth. As someone that literally works, trains, and drills with damage control nearly every day, damage control is when damage has already occurred, and it's the efforts to mitigate and lessen the casualty as much as possible. The damage is already done.
This was used the opposite way against me when I asked aspiringprogenji about high rated games. Either way crackdown 3 is garbage.
We know how it works. No need to point it out
Sitdown and... relax
@DVAcme Perhaps you have the inability to be your own person, but metacritic does not have the final say on whether I enjoy a game or not. The collection of opinions does not determine my facts. @nRicosS If only it was a clever as you wanted it to be.
Yeah, it's just crazy
So have you actually played the game? Or just saying it's a terrible game that nobody would have fun in playing it? Because unless you've played it yourself, all your doing is letting others do the judgement for you.
This game is terrible and looks like a crappy Spiderman. What a disappointment.
Yup not a great game, the lack of party system us really messing things up for me. Cant even try it with my bros.
So you are saying that this person can't have a positive opinion of the games? Gamer group think at it's finest.
59 is above average if you go at a 1-100 score.
Why not make an article about how it's not as good as some people are saying it is? Articles like this seem kind of silly. It's like reviewing the reviews. Just review the game instead of trying to make a buck off someone else.
Metacritic says it's worse than Crackdown 2. That is total BS. It's night and day better than Crackdown 2.
I read last week that Catherine: Full body remake reviewed lower than the original even though the reviewer said they fixed the biggest problem the original had. Famitsu I think it was. Standards seem to have changed in recent years.
Fanboys probably are the most moronic type of gamers - or, they would be if it weren't for fanboys who used broken aggregate sites as proof.
The metacritic I use is how much fun I have playing a game. I don't go in with preconceived notions or care what others say unless I know that they have played it and they have near identical opinions about games to me (which is very rare). Most people bagging this game on sites like this have never played it. I think having fun with a game has become a dead thing and social media has made it about what you SHOULD be finding fun rather than what actually IS fun. I actually haven't played it either but I will be making up my own mind and playing it on Gamepass. From what I have seen of gameplay it looks like something I will enjoy.
People are able to enjoy a game even though it's not well reviewed. Hell, I enjoyed Knack and Knack 2, The Order 1886, Beyond Two Souls, State of Decay 2, etc. But I understand why they weren't well received. The same thing can be said about Crackdown 3. While I've only gotten about 5 hrs in, I didn't enjoy the shallow and uninteresting campaign. I dont see myself finishing the game. But for anyone who does that's great.
Metacritic cannot be trusted. It is an aggregate of all reviews submitted to the site for a particular title, and I GUARANTEE you that people are review bombing this simply because it is a MS title. Metacritic needs to die in a fire!
Lots of damage control. Apparently Xbox fans can dish it out but not take it. As if the games between platforms were identical in how much was downgraded, the hype involved, or all the delays
Ever see one of them movies on metacritic that have a 90+ metascore? some of the most boring movies you will ever watch.
Crackdown has never been high art. I don't know what people were expecting. If you liked Crackdown's core gameplay, well then, you'll like this game. Crackdown is just dumb fun(if you like these kinds of games). It was never gonna be, nor was it ever aiming to be game of the year material.
It now stands at 60 and only has 6 negative reviews out of 59, nice trolling attempt though
No it's really not. It's fine if you enjoy it but that doesn't mean it's a good game. It's OK to like an average game. Just be real and admit what it is.
Right I agree! For example I really liked the order 1886 but I’m not some blind fanboy who will say it’s great because it’s not it’s an average game about as average as you can get but I liked a few things about it and enjoyed myself. I’m not going to pretend it was anything other than average and that’s ok.
Yes much like Sea of Thieves, State of Decay, Quantum Break, Super Lucky's Tale and ReCore they were all below average games but some people like them.
I approve of this comment :)
@gamingunited State of decay and quantum break were not below average games at all. If you didnt like them that's fine but they were both good games. Recore wasnt below average neither, it was just ok and it was fun. I agree with sea of thieves and super lucky's tale being below average. Sot had the world and atmosphere but nothing to do in it, they wasted the beautiful world by making it empty.
Yep, I enjoy the simplicity of Crackdown 3... But it's not what MS promised. The MP is hollow. The destruction is not even close to what we expected.... But still, the campaign is mindless fun. Not too much to think about, jumping your superhero around and gratuitously launching grenades and Rockets at bad guys...
@Dark_Knightmare2 So you're trying to claim that things like movies, books, music and games are objectively good or bad outside of anyone's opinion of them? If a movie gets generally panned by critics but you and your friends love it does that mean that you love a bad movie? Or does it mean that appreciation of art is subjective and comes down to individual tastes and perspectives? Who made the opinions of a few dozen critics the LAW? Their opinions are no more valid than any other individual's. And, clearly, even the critics themselves differ in their opinions. The score you arrive at by averaging a few dozen reviewers' scores is no more objective than the individual scores that comprise it. So, no, you didn't like a bad or average game, you enjoyed a game that, for you, was a generally good game. Your positive experience is no less valid than those who didn't like it or those who thought it was mediocre.
@gaming united you missed Ori and the blind forest - 88 meta Cuphead - 86 meta Killer Instinct - 86 meta Gears of War 4 - 84 meta but yeah below average games /s Or did you just select a few bad eggs to fit the agenda
And this is an opinion piece, and the person is giving his view. Sorry it does not match with yours and others opinion of the game, maybe we should all like and dislike the same thing as your post implies.
An opinion piece that was made because his opinion doesn't match the opinion of others, Sorry our opinions does not match with his opinion of the game, maybe we should all like and dislike the same thing as the "opinion piece" implies.
After playing through the entire campaign on legendary, I reckon it's one of the best open world action games of the generation. I think Sumo missed a trick by not removing difficulty options and making legendary the default. Playing on normal eliminates most of the sense of progression, since it's easy enough from the very beginning on that setting. Why would I call it average, when I believe it to be great? I'll call out the issues of course, as I would with every game. The multiplayer is a broken, disappointing mess. But the pros far outweigh the cons as far as the campain goes.
Feel strongly about the legendary route as well. It makes the game have some gravity
No, I fundamentally disagree with this mentality. Games aren't good or bad or average in any kind of objective universally applicable sense. We can objectively say that games like Crackdown 3 and The Order 1886 didn't have the kinds of qualities that many reviewers were looking for, but that doesn't mean that some people didn't honestly enjoy them. The question of how good a game is doesn't have a universally true answer, it's something each individual decides for him or herself. Aggregate scores are a convenient way to get an idea of what a few dozen reviewers thought of a game, nothing more. Those subjective opinions don't suddenly crystalize into an immutable fact that everyone must bow down to and sacrifice their own opinions to. The individual opinions that make up that average score remain valid on their own, as well as any other individual opinions. I'm not saying this to defend Crackdown 3 in particular. Personally, it never interested me. What I'm talking about is a general principal that applies to all subjective matters. Too often I see people try to use aggregate scores as a way to shut down other people's opinions. This is wrong and illogical. Those aggregate scores are very often comprised of scores that run the gamut from low to high. You can't invalidate the individual opinions that make up the average score without invalidating the average score itself. The average score isn't any more "correct" than any of the individual scores. The way some people treat aggregate scores as the final, objective say on how good a game is seems bizarre. It would be like taking a poll of all N4G users asking them what their favorite hair color is on members of the opposite sex (or the sex/gender they are attracted to) with 43% saying brunette, 32% saying blonde and 25% saying red, then proclaiming that this objectively proves that a sort of "light auburn brown" is the best hair color and anybody that disagrees is an idiot. Holding up an average score as the gospel truth that supposedly overrides anybody else's opinion is just as absurd.
So what is wrong with the game? Are the game controls and mechanics poor? Is the graphics poor? Is the sound awful? Is the fact that it unapologetically has little story and is sold as a game to have fun in wrong? I don't think the game is a 9 or 10... But 7 or 8's would be about right. Seems like most of the people bashing it are bashing it for the cloud stuff and how long it took to develop.
I’ve seen the story V fun argument a couple times. Thing is there’s thousands of games out there with little to no story that were well recieved. Peggle, Super Meat Boy, Tetris, Twisted Metal, Flower, Journey, Resogun, Burnout, Forza, Trials, State of Decay, Portal, Minecraft, Fortnite, Killer Instinct, Warframe, Titanfall, L4D, Pac Man. List is infinite. One of the critiques I’m seeing on Crackdown is that it’s a decade late. Unremarkable mechanics that haven’t aged well in a city (as Jim Sterling put) “not worth saving”. Sunset Overdrive is a prime example of Xbox open world the critics enjoyed.
The game mechanics are just fine. Sometimes simplistic is good. And in this game I quite enjoy it just the way it is. That doesn't mean other people do, but to me it is a 7 or 8 out of 10.
Have you played crackdown 3?
It's one of the worst games of the generation. I don't care how the spin it, it's an embarrassment for Microsoft and Xbox. Deep down, that's how everyone sees it. It's a joke.
Your opinion is yours. You don’t speak for everyone. I agree Microsoft have really dropped the ball with exclusives this gen. And I can see why some wouldn’t like crackdown. Hated sea of thieves and state of decay... But I’m absolutely loving C3, and your opinion doesn’t change that. 😄
That’s fine if you find joy in a indie $60 game or a $10 a month fee to play... There are people out there that drink urine for sexual pleasure... the world is weird.. But, I gues what separates the oddities vs the average perspn is where the “majority” find joy. If you get $60 worth of joy with THE biggest gaming lie in history, next to the second Kinect, cool. Nothing wrong with that. And people can share their opinions. Others get paid to write positive opinions. Heck, Microsoft even pays people to spread negative information.
@starsi360 Nah, you're just being border line toxic, attention hungry, and obsessed with perception in line with your opinion. Critics are objective. There is a certain way to view games to score it as a product and not a personal item of interest. The game failed to deliver and MS misled everyone, again. You don't have to tell everyone that your different
It's not though is it? It's not Metal Gear Survive levels of bad.
Or Life of Black Tiger, The Quiet Man, Troll and I and Fallout 76.
I don't see it that way, deep down or on the surface. I just nullified your statement, and it was so easy.
Have you played it?
I would rather gouge my eyes out with a rusty nail. I only play good games, not dated and bland pieces of gutter trash.
No its not, stop trying to damage control this garbage fgs.
It’s good when the standard of gaming on your console of choice is extremely low. By those standards this is a huge feather in Ms’s cap! Edit: who wrote this article? Maybe those two MS apologists on this site, Septic and that red ranger avatar guy?
Thats all i have seen here, but the game is good, the game is the best openworld game, but i like the game so it is not bad, my opinion is the game is great so it IS great, but the game has the best destruction ever....o jeah i forgot, it is fun to play. The game is below avarage no damagecontrol will change that.